See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279867616

ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN MALAYSIAN

EDUCATION SYSTEM: ITS EXISTENCE AND
IMPLICATION

Conference Paper · July 2013

CITATIONS READS

3 14,771

2 authors:

Ramiza Darmi Peter Robert Albion

Universiti Putra Malaysia University of Southern Queensland
11 PUBLICATIONS 7 CITATIONS 183 PUBLICATIONS 1,180 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The Snapshot Studies View project

Remote Access Labs for fun, innovation and education View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ramiza Darmi on 08 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 3nd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC2013)
3-4 Jul, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN MALAYSIAN EDUCATION SYSTEM: ITS EXISTENCE

AND IMPLICATION

Ramiza Darmi1,2 and Peter Albion1

1
Faculty of Education, University of Southern Queensland (USQ), Australia
2
Center for the Advancement of Language Competence, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM),
Malaysia
Email: Ramiza.Darmi@usq.edu.au / ramiza@putra.upm.edu.my

ABSTRACT

This article sets out to give a historical account of English language in Malaysia. The
language background of Malaysians is very much tied up with the historical and education
background of the country. English language continues to be taught as a compulsory
language in schools despite the evolution of the Malaysian education system. Communicative
language teaching is an approach to engage learners in interaction and meaningful
communication. However, differences between the school and university classrooms
differentiate the language learning process. Language learners who still have to learn English
in universities need to develop a positive attitude for meaningful learning to occur.

Keywords: English language, Malaysian education system, globalisation, communicative

language teaching, language anxiety

INTRODUCTION
English is spoken and used as a second language (L2) in the countries which were typically
ex-colonies of the United Kingdom or the United States including Malaysia, India,
Philippines and Nigeria (Thirusanku & Melor, 2012). Malaysia is one of the Asian countries
that is adopting a bilingual system of education. The aim is to establish a balance between
national and international needs and challenges manifested through linguistic educational
policies (Gill & Kirkpatrick, 2013). With reference to the Malaysian education system,
English is placed as the L2 (Gill, 2002) and, in line with the education policy, English
language is made a compulsory subject at all levels of education implying its existence “side
by side with strong indigenous languages, wide use in speaking, and intranational
outstanding, sometimes official functions, as the language of politics, the media, jurisdiction,
higher education, and other such domains” (Thirusanku & Melor, 2012, p. 2). Reflecting on
the Malaysian pluralist society, the learners are commonly bilingual, trilingual or even
multilingual.

In the Malaysian education system, a formal style of English language learning takes place in
classrooms; and Jeon-Ellis, Debski and Wiggleswort (2005) define the L2 classroom as “a
social context to which learners bring themselves and their past experiences in which they
establish certain relationships and attempt to participate and engage in tasks in ways that best
fit their social needs” (p. 123). Excluding preschool level, the minimum formal learning of
 3nd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC2013)
3-4 Jul, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

English language for Malaysian learners is eleven years. This paper explores the burgeoning
of English language in Malaysia from the historical aspects and its importance in
globalisation. The paper also reflects on the language learning problems of Malaysian
learners.

REFORMING MALAYSIAN EDUCATION SYSTEM

Pre-independence
Initially, the Malays, being the local population, formed religious schools. The Malay
language was also the lingua franca for business communication purposes until the British
came to Malaya (the name for Malaysia before independence). When the British administered
Malaya from the eighteenth century till its independence (Fei, Siong, Kim, & Azizah, 2010),
they not only established both English medium primary and secondary schools but the
English language became the lingua franca for business communication purposes. The
growth in Malaysian industry around rubber and tin attracted immigrants from China and
India into Malaya. The immigrants also realised the importance of education and they
established their own schools where the mother tongue (MT) of each ethnic group was the
medium of instruction.

The majority of the learners who attended the English medium primary schools were the
Chinese since many lived in urban areas. A few Malays who benefitted from the English
medium of instruction were the sons of royalty and chiefs; whereas the Indians remained in
the estates and did not get the opportunity to attend the British education system due to
economic disparity. Among the advantages promised to those learners who received
education from the British education system were opportunities for further education,
employment in the civil service, and access to scholarships. They were also highly regarded
in the society and were offered important posts in the government then. In general, prior to
independence, the education system that existed in Malaya was a fragmented education
system.

Before independence, the educational system in Malaya was in accordance to the Barnes
Report of 1951. The proposal was to develop a national school system in British Malaya by
providing primary education for six years in both Malay and English languages. Other
communities totally disagreed with the suggestion and felt that Chinese and Tamil should
have been recognised too to represent the new definition of Malaya‟s national identity. As a
result, the Barnes Report proved to be a failure. Consequently, the British approved
bilingualism in Malay schools and trilingualism in the Chinese and Tamil schools.

With the objective to reform the Malaya education system, another educational proposal, the
Razak Report, was released in 1956. The Education Committee was led by the late Minister
for Education in the Federation of Malaysia Interim Government, Abdul Razak bin Hussain.
An enhancement was made to the Barnes Report and endorsed the Malay language as the
medium of instruction while retaining the vernacular schools of Chinese and Tamil.
Since the goal was to unite all the races, the Malay language was the principal language for
national integration. The primary schools were the Malay, English, Chinese and Tamil
medium schools, whilst the secondary schools were the Malay and English schools
only. The National Education Policy was designed and included the common content
syllabus as to ensure that pupils would undergo the same process of enculturation. The
 3nd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC2013)
3-4 Jul, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

report‟s terms of reference were to establish „„a national system of education acceptable to
the people of the Federation as a whole which will satisfy their needs and promote their
cultural, social, economic and political development, having regard to the intention to make
Malay the national language of the country whilst preserving and sustaining the growth of the
language and culture of other communities living in the country‟‟ (Federation of Malaya,
1956, p. 1).
In Malaysia an older generation (aged 50 and above) who had been English educated prior to
independence are now a minority. During their time, English was practically their first
language or an important L2 and when they communicate in the English language they still
portray the British accent.

Post-independence
Malaysia achieved its independence in 1957 and Malay language was proclaimed the national
language. Nevertheless, English was declared the second most important language in
Malaysia after the national language. Consequently, English was used as the official language
in administration.

Four years later, in 1960, the Minister of Education, Abdul Rahman bin Talib, set up a
committee to review the implementation of the National Education Policy as suggested in the
Razak Report. The Committee was named after its chairman, Abdul Rahman Talib, the
Minister of Education then. The report, known as the Rahman Talib Report, was tabled with
recommendations:
 To uphold the recommendations of the Razak Report;
 To have a bilingual (Malay language and English) medium of education in the
schools. It was hoped that this would help unite the different races in Malaysia;
 To set up „remove‟ classes for students from vernacular schools, where students spent
one extra year learning English or Malay language. This was to help in the transition
from primary education in the vernacular languages.
(adapted from Foo & Richards, 2004, p. 231)

The Education Act 1961 was produced based on both the Razak Report and the Rahman
Talib Report. The Act contained a principal law that regulates education in Malaysia at all
levels. It also introduced the national schools for Malay-medium primary schools and
national-type schools referring to the vernacular schools. Other provisions were:
 Malay language, the national language, as the medium of instruction in schools;
 Providing a common curriculum
 Administering a common public examination for schools
(Ales, 2010)

1970 was the beginning year to implement the National Education Policy. Gradually, the
English medium schools were converted to national schools while retaining the national-type
schools. The Malaysian government enforced the phasing out of English language as the
medium of instruction. The switch to Malay language as the medium of instruction was to be
facilitated by learning the language as a subject in the national type primary schools and a
one-year language transition class – the Remove Class, attached to the Malay medium
secondary schools. Nevertheless, English would become an important L2 taught in schools;
thus, common content syllabi for English for both the primary and secondary schools were
 3nd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC2013)
3-4 Jul, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

enacted. However, the switch between the languages saw a decline in the amount of English
language exposure to Malaysian learners at schools.

In 1979 the Minister of Education then, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, tabled the outcomes after a
committee reviewed the implementation of the National Education Policy. The major
reformation to the education system was the launching of the New Primary Schools
Curriculum or Kurikulum Baru Sekolah Rendah (KBSR) in 1983 and the Integrated
Secondary Schools Curriculum or Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah (KBSM) in
1989. Both curricula were fully implemented by the year 2000. The aim of the KBSR is:

“to equip learners with basic skills and knowledge of the English language so as to
enable them to communicate both orally and in writing, in and out of school.”
("Sukatan Pelajaran Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Rendah Bahasa Inggeris," 200, p.
1)

Whilst the aims of the KBSM are:

“to extend learners‟ English language proficiency in order to meet their needs to use
English in certain situations in everyday life, for knowledge acquisition, and for future
workplace needs.” ("Sukatan Pelajaran Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah
Bahasa Inggeris ", 2000, p. 2)

The learning outcomes outlined in the KBSR encompass the four language skills – listening,
speaking, reading and writing – reflecting the needs in the daily life of Malaysian society.
The outcomes continue to the secondary school curriculum, KBSM, as an extension to give
opportunities to learners to engage in wider reading for enjoyment and self-development, as
well as to develop an understanding of other societies, cultures, values and traditions to
contribute to emotional and spiritual growth. The KBSM English syllabus advocated the CLT
syllabus integrating all four language skills to achieve a total development of all skills. To
create enjoyment and for self-development, a literature component was introduced to the
secondary school syllabus.

The change in the medium of instruction from English to Malay language has led to
precipitated deterioration in the English language competence among Malaysian learners.
One of the measures to arrest the decline in the English language competence was
reintroducing of English as the medium of instruction for science and mathematics beginning
Year 1 in primary school and Form 1 in secondary school by the Ministry of Education in
2003. The rationale of the move was to prepare learners at the tertiary level particularly on
science and technology for most reference material is mainly in the English language. Next, it
was necessary to prepare a technologically advanced workforce able to access the latest
knowledge and research in English. However, the government aborted the policy in 2009
since the examination results in those two subjects between urban and rural learners were
diversified. Learners in the rural schools were the disadvantaged group. Throughout the
years, the education authorities who could not assign qualified staff able to teach these
subjects in English. The reversed policy strengthened the position of the Malay language as
the main thrust of transitional bilingual education but the decision leads to a decline in
English language proficiency.
 3nd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC2013)
3-4 Jul, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

In light of the economy, in the era of globalisation Malaysia is requiring universal use of
English for employment locally and in particular, for Malaysians to remain globally
competitive. To reinforce the importance of both languages, under the Tenth Malaysia Plan
for 2011 to 2015 (The Economic Planning Unit) as stated in Chapter 5, the government has
implemented the „Upholding Bahasa Melayu and Strengthening English‟ program during the
Plan period (p. 201). The objective of the program is to sustain Malay language as the official
national language and retain the language as a medium of unity and solidarity, and
simultaneously to enhance English proficiency among Malaysians to prepare them with a
sense of competitiveness and to explore new knowledge at national and international levels.
In summary, the importance of English is still generally acknowledged.

COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING

In relation to language learning, there is a similarity between learning English language and
acquiring first language (L1). Lado (1957) and James (1980) assume the tendency for L2
learners to switch MT being the L1 features to L2 production; nevertheless, communication
in L2 is necessary to achieve competency in L2. Another method to acquire L2 is through
exposure to the language including listening to the language. According to the acquisition-
learning hypothesis of Krashen (1982), „acquisition‟ is the product of a subconscious process
very similar to the process when children acquire their L1. The acquired system requires
meaningful interaction and natural communication in the target language (TL) when
interlocutors focus only on the communicative act. In other words, Malaysian learners may
be listening to English language but it is vital that they use English language to communicate
to develop their language competency. .

The Malaysian Curriculum Development Centre proposed communicative language teaching

(CLT) in 1974 for English language syllabus. CLT refers to both processes and goals in
classroom learning with an attempt to operationalize the concept of communicative
competence (Richards, 2002). CLT is an approach to teaching English as second language
(ESL) or English as a foreign language (EFL) emphasising interactions as both the means and
the ultimate goal of learning a language. CLT is also a syllabus adopted for English language
learning at university aiming to get learners engaged in real-life communication in the
English language. The classroom enrolment in university should enable English instructors to
encourage participation in English during the learning process. Classes in Malaysian schools
are still large classes, normally around 40 learners, in contrast to English classes in
universities which are around 30. Thus, participation in university classes should more likely
to happen than school classes.

In the university context, English language learners are segregated according to Malaysian
University Entrance Test (MUET) results upon their enrolment in the undergraduate
programs. MUET is compulsory for pre-university learners intending to pursue to
undergraduate programs at public universities in Malaysia where it is used as one of the
selection criteria. English is a compulsory subject to pass in the secondary school national
public examination to enter university but it is not a compulsory subject to obtain the exit
certificate from secondary school level. In relation to the English language groups, learners
who achieved MUET band 6 and 5 - very good user and good user, respectively, will only
need to enrol in English elective courses. In general, these groups of learners are motivated to
 3nd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC2013)
3-4 Jul, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

learn the English language. On the contrary, learners who achieved a band lower than 5 will
have to take up English academic courses and the English university courses. Enrolment in
the courses means mixed English proficiency and diversified personal characteristics of
learners in every classroom. Though learners who achieved band 1 and 2 will need to take the
English academic course whilst other learners who achieved band 3 and 4 will enrol in the
English university courses, they are carrying with them their different perceptions towards
and past experience of learning English language. The drawback in such a classroom setting
is the learners do not learn from the better learners who have high motivation and realise the
need to be proficient in English.

Despite CLT as an approach to teaching ESL, the problem in acquiring English language is
the learners. English is second to Malay language in importance but not all Malaysian
learners are proficient in the language. There are three main reasons to this generalisation.
First, learners react towards the English language as the first, second or even a foreign
language. The decision depends on, among other things, the locality the learners live in. For
instance, learners who reside and attend schools outside major cities or in rural areas tend to
place EFL. Usually they experience limited exposure and usage of English; in contrast to
learners who attend schools in urban areas. Second, contrasting between ESL and EFL,
learners in urban areas cover more domains of communication including the four skills as
well as grammar, in contrast to learners in rural areas. For EFL learners, learning English in
class has no purpose and functions when they leave the class. The learners do not find the
need to speak in the English language and they feel more comfortable speaking in their own
MT. Third, an L2 speaker demonstrates a higher fluency than an EFL speaker of the same
language. Due to that, EFL learners reveal attributes such as an unenthusiastic attitude and
low interest towards learning the target language (TL) supported by a discouraging
environment in which to use the TL. As a result, EFL learners encounter a challenging
experience to acquire the TL. The first two reasons concur with the claim made by Thornton
and Houser (2005) on the fact that the engagement in the English language seems impossible
when L2 learners get limited opportunity to use English outside the classroom despite the
opportunities to speak and hear the TL only in the classroom.

Furthermore, these changes have created literacy problems among Malaysian universities‟
learners and “competence in English among learners has been on the decline since a change
in language policy was changed from that of English to Bahasa Malaysia in 1970” (Chan &
Wong, 2004, p. 1). The decline has lead to a rise in number of unemployed graduates for
failing “to secure jobs because of their lack of competence in the English language, evident
particularly during interviews” (Chan & Helen, 2006, p. 309). Nevertheless, the advent of
Information Technology and (IT) and globalization has made English language proficiency
imperative for developing countries such as Malaysia.

To summarise, Malaysian learners have longer exposure to learning English language in

schools compared to learning it in university. CLT is an approach to achieve its goals but
learners need to overcome any affective factors that they have accumulated throughout the
eleven years to be able to participate in language learning whilst it is pertinent to English
language instructors in university to help by extending learner opportunities as a strategy to
develop them to be competent speakers of English.
 3nd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC2013)
3-4 Jul, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING ANXIETY

In relation to language anxiety, Brown (1994) emphasises that learning L2 or FL is a complex
task susceptible to human anxiety. The extent to which language learners participate actively
in the language learning process is determined by their attitudes. Feeling positively towards
the TL reveals the learner‟s positive attitude and consequently correlates to achievement in
English as well as successful acquisition in the TL. On the other hand, learners who have
negative attitudes towards learning the TL do not expend the effort of speaking to acquire L2
aspects. Negative attitudes are associated with feelings such as uneasiness, frustration, self-
doubt, and apprehension resulting in undue stress on the learners particularly when they are
expected to participate actively within the language learning classroom. These negative
feelings will demotivate them in learning the TL. According to Yang (2003) among other
affective variables, anxiety may be an important one since it not only inhibits learning and
using English but it has detrimental effects on the learning process.

Language anxiety is defined as the feeling of tension and apprehension experienced by

learners in the FL classroom (MacIntyre & Gardner, 1991). However, language anxiety is “a
distinctive complex of self-perceptions, beliefs, feelings and behaviours related to classroom
language learning process” (Horwitz, Horwitz, & Cope, 1986, p. 128). This definition
perfectly reflects the Malaysian English language learners because they are seen to have
difficulty to give responses in the TL in language classrooms and they believe whatever
responses they give must be correct responses.

Other physical reactions from the learners include the feeling of discomfort in the English
language class. They may manifest nervousness, lack of confidence and physical changes.
Throughout the language learning they prefer to be reticent. They attempt not to embarrass
themselves by making mistakes in giving responses so they feel it is safe to be passive. At the
same time, they pre-empt other learners in the class having better English proficiency. They
also worry if their English instructors would under evaluate them and point out their mistakes
to the whole class which can lead to personal embarrassment to individual learners. In an
interview with a group of Malaysian tertiary learners, they reported to experience
nervousness and difficulty to speak in the English language that made them to be reticent and
passive in classrooms (Noor Hashimah, 2007). Furthermore, the use of English language was
limited to them and confined to English language classroom. Both Noor Hashimah (2007)
and Rosemala (2008) found that Malaysian learners experienced language anxiety personally,
school instructional practices as well as social and cultural influence which made them
linguistically and psychologically isolated from the English language use.

Inevitably, Malaysian English language learners in universities who achieved MUET

between band 1 to 4 are noticed to experience anxiety. The situation is worse when they get
to know that English courses are compulsory papers in university which they need to pass
every paper. Unless they change their preset minds towards the language learning, the
learners will still experience anxiety “occurring at each stage of language learning namely
acquisition (input), retention (processing) and production (output)” (Ramiza & Peter, 2012, p.
171). According to Oxford (1990), anxiety hinders language learners from being active in
learning as they consistently “experience uneasiness learning and thinking in” (Ramiza &
Peter, 2012, p. 171) the TL. Further, she affirms the affective variables such as anxiety, as the
most important influences determining success or failure of language learning. Krashen‟s
 3nd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC2013)
3-4 Jul, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

(1982) affective filter hypothesis claims a combination of low level of affective variables
raises the affective filter causing a mental block preventing information from being used for
acquisition and results in poor language learning.

CONCLUSION
Fundamentally, Malay language is accepted to unite the culturally multilingual society of the
Malaysians; on the other hand, English language has a functional role because of its use as an
international language of communication in the economy, thus, demonstrating its pervasive
influence through its role in the education system. A good command of the English language
among graduates will ensure employment; consequently will offer them to go global and
international. .
 3nd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC2013)
3-4 Jul, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

References
Ales, P. (2010). The language medium policy in Malaysia: A plural scoiety model? Review of
European Studies, 2(2), 192-200.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Chan, S. H., & Helen, T. (2006). English for Mathematics and Science: Current Malaysian
Language-in-education policies and practices. Language and Education, 20(4), 306-
321.
Chan, S. H., & Wong, B. E. (2004). Assessing oral skills of pre-tertiary students: The nature
of the communicative act. Paper presented at the International Conference on English
Instruction and Assessment
http://fllcccu.ccu.edu.tw/conference/2004ch_conferences/achievement/paper01.pdf
Fei, W. F., Siong, L. K., Kim, L. S., & Azizah, Y. (2010). English use as an identity marker
among Malaysian undergraduates. 3L: Journal of Language Teaching, Linguistics
and Literature, 18(1), 145-155.
Foo, B., & Richards, C. (2004). English in Malaysia. RELC Journal, 35(229). doi:
10.1177/003368820403500209
Gill, S. K. (2002). International communication: English language challenges for Malaysia.
Serdang: Universiti Putra Malaysia Press.
Gill, S. K., & Kirkpatrick, A. (2013). English in Asian and European Higher Education. In C.
A. Chapelle (Ed.), The Encyclopedianof Applied Linguistics: Blackwell Publishing
Ltd.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. A. (1986). Foreign Language classroom anxiety.
Modern Language Jounal, 70(2), 125-132.
Jeon-Ellis, G., Debski, R., & Wiggleswort, G. (2005). Oral interaction around computers in
the project-oriented CALL classroom. Language Learning and Technology, 9(3), 121-
145.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon:
Oxford.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1991). Methods and results in the study of anxiety and
language learning: A review of the literature. Language Learning.
Noor Hashimah, A. A. (2007). ESL students' perspectives on language anxiety. (Ph. D.),
Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang.
Pandian, A. (2002). English language teaching in Malaysia today. Asia-Pacific Journal of
Education, 22(2), 35-52.
Ramiza, D., & Peter, A. (2012). Exploring language anxiety of Malaysian learners. Paper
presented at the 2nd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC) 2012, Bond
University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Richards, J. C. (Ed.). (2002). Theories of teaching in language teaching. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Rosemala, I. (2008). Factors affecting less proficient ESL learners' use of strategies for
language and content area learning. Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang.
Sukatan Pelajaran Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah Bahasa Inggeris (2000) (pp. 1-
17). Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.
Sukatan Pelajaran Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Rendah Bahasa Inggeris. (2001) (pp. 1-19).
Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.
 3nd Malaysian Postgraduate Conference (MPC2013)
3-4 Jul, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Thirusanku, J., & Melor, M. Y. (2012). The many faces of Malaysian English. International
Scholarly Research Network. doi: 10.5402/2012/138982
Thornton, P., & Houser, C. (2005). Using mobile phones in English education in Japan.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(3), 217-228. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-
2729.2005.00129.x

View publication stats